Like I said, a poorly implemented event doesn’t mean it won’t work.
Why wouldn’t they? They were intended to fight a different class of vehicles.
1 Like
There plenty of fixes in this thread for the problem.
Calling someone a troll is actually a insult.
They are literally intended to fight heavily armored vehicles, that’s the whole point of HEAT. Moving them up for doing that they’re supposed to do doesn’t make sense.
I looked through the first 200 comments in this thread for suggestions, fixes, and/or comments on the problem and found no good arguments:
- Make light tanks useless for everything except for breaking barrels (which is incredibly inconsistent), tracks (which doesn’t do anything to stop from being killed), and flanking (which Gaijin has been consistently been making harder and harder with their terrible map changes)
- Make HEATFS give negative SL against WWII tanks - Obviously stupid, why should someone be punished for using a round that can actually pen an armored vehicle? Is APCR next? AP?
- Extend the limit to pre-1953 and post-1953 - Again, just makes vehicles after those years that should be lower BRs useless
- Make the post-WWII tanks that should be at WWII BRs reserve tanks - Again, this just makes them useless against ANY uptiers and also makes gameplay incredibly stale because of the limited types of opponents you can go against
- Remove the post-WWII tanks that should be at WWII BRs - Legitimately just making them unusable, wow
- Remove the HEATFS from the post-WWII vehicles - Why? Also, some of the vehicles only use HEATFS
- Just ignore the problem, they’re glass cannons - Glass cannons need to do excessive damage (or penetration) at their BR, moving HEATFS tanks up past the BRs they should be at means they will do at best average damage (which is not what a glass cannon is)
- “Heavy tanks shouldn’t be frontally penetrable by everything” - Yes, they should. Weakspots should exist, nearly all HEATFS vehicles are easily penned by MGs, and heavy tank gameplay should be harder than sitting still the whole match
- “You don’t need to kill everything right away, let the heavies push to get the kills” - Heavies should not being the only things that are able to kill things (the comment I paraphrased it from even mentioned mediums don’t need to be able to kill things)
- “HEATFS vehicles would actually do better at higher BRs due to overpressuring lightly armored tanks” - HEATFS overpressure is incredibly inconsistent in my experience, and the spall pattern on lightly armored tanks is bad (and HEATFS spalling is already terrible)
- Cut the game in two with a <=6-7 BR and a >6-7 BR group - This just punishes any nation with 6.3-7.3 lineups, nor addresses why this is necessary
3 Likes
No all you did show your bias against a Cold war serpation, you simply dont want change because you feel comfortable how it is now.
Nothing of the suggested solutions is indicating to make anything usles.
To the nations that dont have vehicels in said time period, they simply dont fight there and skip it. Simpel as.
2 Likes
I don’t get why there’s so much hostility on the forum towards any kind of efforts to make the mm more immersive.
Every time historical mm is mentioned everyone absolutely loses their shit:
-says it’s been proven countless times to never be balanced (no one has proven shit)
-describes the person who proposed it as a bad, blind, stupid german main that watched history channels too much
-proceeds to stat shame
-uses straw man arguments like “you want a historical mm, how about panzer 2 vs kv1”
-mentions post pen damage
-mentions minor nations having gaps (as if that was players’ problem, that they can skip some grind)
-mentions a cold war apc with a 50 cal or a 20mm on top not being able to kill mbts (as if that was it’s job)
and more endless lame excuses to keep some niche cold war tanks meta, which the majority have never heard of, and ruin the experience on some actually famous and relevant tanks like t34s, shermans, tigers and panthers.
Is it such a difficult concept to understand, that historical mm doesn’t mean all WW2 vehicles being at the same br? Here, have an example to outline how it should look like. It will be for Germany and Russia, because surprise surprise, they have the most extensive history of tank usage.
BR Germany Russia
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1.0 Panzer 2 C BT-5
Panzer 3 B T-28 (1938)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1.3 Panzer 2 F T-26
Panzer 3 E
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1.7 Panzer 3 F
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2.0 BT-7
T-28
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2.3 Panzer 4 E T-28E
Panzer 3 J BT-7M
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2.7 Panzer 4 F1 T-34-76 1940
Stug 3 A T-50
T-70
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3.0 KV-1 L-11
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3.7 Panzer 3 J1, L T-34-76 1941
Panzer 4 F2 KV-1 ZiS-5 (without additional armor)
Stug 3 F
----------------------------------------------------------------------
4.0 Panzer 4 G T-34-76E STZ (60mm front)
Stug 3 G KV-1 ZiS-5 (with additional armor)
Panzer 3 M, N
Marder 3 H
----------------------------------------------------------------------
4.7 Panzer 4 H T-34-76 1942
KV-1 S, C (should be added)
T-34-57
----------------------------------------------------------------------
5.3 Tiger 1 H1, E IS-1
Panther D, A KV-85
Sd.Kfz.234/2 Puma (yes) SU-85
SU-152
----------------------------------------------------------------------
5.7 Ferdinand
----------------------------------------------------------------------
6.0 Panther G T-34-85 ZiS-S-53, D-5T
Tiger 2 P, H IS-2, IS-2 1944
Panzer 4 J (yes) SU-85M, SU-100
Jagdpanzer 4 (yes), 4/70 ISU-152
Hetzer (yes) ISU-122, ISU-122S
Jagdpanther
Stug 4 (could be added)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
7.0 Jagdtiger T-44
Panther F
----------------------------------------------------------------------
7.3 Maus T-44-100
Tiger 2 105 IS-3
Panther 2 IS-4
Was it really that hard? Historical, fun, no bs with cold war tanks. Keep in mind that it’s a rough idea of how it should look like.
Is it balanced? Depends on the definition.
If balance means every vehicle is competitive, then no.
If balance means every vehicle is usable, then yes.
If that’s too much, minimal adjustments can be made, for example moving Panzer 4 J next to Panzer 4 H and it still will be mostly historical and balanced using both definitions. However, I see no reason why for example Panzer 4 J should be competitive, there are a lot of competitive Panzer 4 variants and the J is a late, simplified variant, representing the collapse of the third reich, but even in this chart it still can easily kill most of it’s opponents, if not frontally, then from the side.
If historical mm works for WW2 BRs, I see no reason why it would fail for cold war BRs.
Edit: I know Tiger 2 105 and Panther 2 didn’t exist, but this BR is already alternative history anyway.
2 Likes
Balancing Russia and Germany at WW2 Br is relatively easy but what about the minor nations?
2 Likes
Minor nations should not dictate balance.
2 Likes
Minor nations should be thankful they are even in the game. I wish there was a Polish tech tree, even if it had 2 tanks (1 tank and 1 tankette to be exact).
No.
Yeah probably because of a attitude like this.
3 Likes
But they shouldn’t be ignored.
3 Likes
There’s a huge difference between “armor shouldn’t matter” and “minor nations should be left to rot”.
The issue with minor nations is they will never field a full, competitive tree. You can’t have little to no vehicle development and compete with global super powers. Gaijin trying to force that to happen is ruining the game.
1 Like
Did you read the suggestions, fixes, and comments that I wrote down?
- Making light tanks only able to break barrels, break tracks, or get kills on flanks is making the type of vehicle useless for most gameplay scenarios. Breaking barrels is incredibly inconsistent from angles that aren’t near perpendicular, breaking tracks doesn’t stop a tank from killing you, and flanking is being made harder through Gaijin’s continual bad map design decisions
- Making HEATFS rounds have a negative SL multiplier against WWII tanks means that some vehicles are literally impossible to make SL with, or the vehicle is stuck with a worse round
- Extending the limit to 1953 makes all post-1953 tanks that should be lower BRs useless at their unnecessarily high BRs
- Making the post-WWII tanks that should be lower BRs into reserve tanks means that they cannot compete with vehicles even 0.3 BR above them, and they also have less tanks that they can actually fight against because the only tanks they can fight are other post-WWII reserve tanks
- Removing the post-WWII tanks that should be at WWII BRs literally makes them unusable
- Removing HEATFS from WWII BR vehicles will either make it so that a vehicle has no ammo to fire or it will be stuck with way worse ammo than its BR requires (plus in the case of something like the M36B1, there would be no reason to even play the vehicle anymore due to there being better non-HEATFS options)
- A tank needs to do massive damage to be considered a glass cannon, so if a tank does not do massive damage at its BR it cannot be considered a glass cannon (so the glass cannon argument cannot be used to justify the era split)
- Heavy tanks should be pennable by all tanks within reason (sure, a 20mm AA gun shouldn’t be able to pen something frontally except for a full downtier, but anything with a reasonable cannon should be able to at least pen a weakspot)
- Letting heavies be the only type of tank that can get kills, and treating all other types of tanks as supports for the heavies, is just bad game design. Other types of tanks should be able to get kills.
- A tank being able to overpressure light tanks with HEATFS doesn’t mean that it should be moved up in BR to where the Cold War light tanks are, as there are much better HE rounds to use on other tanks and HEATFS was literally meant to fight heavy armor
- Creating a BR split at 6-7 would mean that which ever nation has a lineup 0.3 BR above the cutoff will have to deal with 100% uptiers, basically making the lineup unusable (plus this doesn’t address any of the supposed “problems” with very mobile HEAT-slingers)
Why should that be the case? If a vehicle performs well at its BR there is no justification to move it up.
The problem is that a game should first and foremost be fun, and historical matchmaking would not be fun.
I agree some of these things are obviously not good/real arguments, but post pen damage, minor nation gaps, and low tier APCs that are SPAAs in game are definitely valid reasons to be against it.
By any tank with a reasonable caliber, most definitely. I put a caveat in an above part of this comment about small caliber stuff (in terms of tank calibers) like 20mm cannons probably shouldn’t pen unless its a full downtier on a weakspot, but most cannons should definitely pen a weakspot.
Exactly.
Source???
1 Like
Sorry if I came across as rude.
What I meant is that if a nation has a modest tank arsenal, then players of that nation shouldn’t be ungrateful about having this nation in the game in the first place, even if their tanks aren’t the best, they are still usable and they are here.
M-51 probably wouldn’t do great against T54s and T-55As, but it wouldn’t be completely useless either. It still has AMX-30s gun, which is more than enough to kill T-54s and T-55As.
You can’t expect to be free to destroy an entire BR bracket, just so your tank can be better.
But this would destroy the Swedish tree up to rank 4.
2 Likes
Source???
Are you serious? Do you honestly think South Africa could compete with the US? Finland? Sweden?
Do you think sub trees have their own full tech trees? What actual minor nations in game cannot have a full tech tree (outside of Israel, I guess)?
And fix all of the other nations (8), except Israel, which shouldn’t exist until after WW2.
The problem is you would also have vehicles like the ikv 72 that would fight t54s as well let alone half the SPAAs getting moved to a BR above the WW2 BR.
This is why I’m against historical matchmaking and similar matchmaking, it would destroy BR Brackets.
2 Likes